The bluesky presentation of this thread is very "holy shit what happened in between here"

...to accomplish what I described above? Maybe I'm dumb but I don't see which part quite does that, here's my whole rule below. "Allowed price offset" seems closest but the fact that it says "...but not quite matching low" suggests that it's a price *above* the historical low, not below?

@isthereanydeal.com feature request: I get *so many* emails for shapez 2 because they keep lowering the price by, like, a few cents. Setting "strictly better" for new notifications helped a bit, but could we get an option to set a difference (say, 5% lower) compared to the last notification?

Hostage video vibes

www.nytimes.com/2025/01/26/t...

Done, hbd!

Is this a product of the information environment, or of people rebuilding their realities around their political desires?

Like, this part of the exit poll stuck out to me. I don't think people are misinformed about their own finances; maybe they just say what they need to justify voting Trump?

Hey, not sure if this is something you know/can help with but I'm having difficulty with rate limits. It looks like I can only connect to the API 100 times per day? Am I missing something?

Everyone knows Harris shellacked him last night, but the Times is the Times so you knew they were gonna have to find someone to write this stuff

Claim #3: "Harris wants to further entrench the E.V. mandate that sends your tax dollars to China"

Ruling: "This is misleading."

Notes the claim refers to the Inflation Reduction Act which does not mandate EVs at all and aims to reduce reliance on China. "Misleading"??? What! Are! We! Doing! Here!

Claim #2: Harris voted "to preserve NAFTA, to extend NAFTA"

Ruling: "This is misleading."

Notes Harris was a local prosecutor when NAFTA passed in 1993 and voted *against* a NAFTA update in 2020. Sorry, but "misleading"? That's a straight-up lie! What are we doing here!

Claim #1: "Kamala let in 20 million illegal aliens to compete with Americans for scarce homes"

Ruling: "This is exaggerated."

Fact check dives into the economic argument for several paragraphs, completely ignores the absolutely bonkers "Kamala let in" part at the start. Did she, NYT? Did she???

It seems like people finally succeeded in bullying the Times into fact-checking the Trump-Vance campaign for once. Did they do a good job? Let's find out, looking claim by claim!

The last thing McWhorter does is pin this on Obama for not fixing racism. That's an absurd standard (premised on his strawman that this is all about Harris's race), and completely misses why people are energized for Harris to have stepped in and reinvigorate a race that flailed under Biden:

McWhorter thinks the 'joy' around the Harris campaign is simply code for "we picked a Black woman".

I think he's wrong in thinking you wouldn't see the same thing from a few of the people he named - for example, Walz is half the reason for the joy in this campaign.